Re: How do you deprecate URIs? Re: OWL-DL and linked data

On 9 Jul 2008, at 12:20, Dan Brickley wrote:
> I doubt we can get very far with this in the absence of examples.  
> Would anyone like to collect up a dozen various owl:sameAs claims  
> published explicitly in the Web that might be considered  
> questionable? (for now let's set aside cases where owl:sameAs is  
> implied by other constructs).


I agree examples would be useful. My hunch from some that appeared in  
previous threads on this topic, is that some of these may have to do  
with different sites making claims about Berlin, where it is not clear  
wether it is Berlin the geographical region, Berlin the political  
region, Berlin during, after or before the cold war, ...

These types of problems suggest to me that they won't be solved by  
improving OWL. Rather other types of reasoners will be needed: for  
example temporal reasoners, spatial reasoners, mereological reasoners.  
One can now create relations that indicate the distinction between  
these different types of Berlins. Just create temporal slices of  
Berlin and create relations such as temp:overlap, temp:before,  
temp:after.... But there are no good tools to reason with these as of  
yet (franz has implemented some stuff, but they are missing a good  
vocab)

For some reason a lot of people seem to think that everything can be  
done with owl. OWL gives us some very good concepts for reasoning with  
ontologies. But there are many other ways of coming to conclusions  
that those.

There may even be need for fuzzy reasoners.

Henry